GTA IV - Was anyone disappointed?
- Thread starter themightyodog
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Id just like to ask alexharman for five things that make this game better then previous entries into the series, off of his long list. Or if it really is a long list, 10 things? I'm truly fascinated to know.
Normally, you would. But you did in fact remind me of several cases of running for ages to get to the nearest road and then waiting another age for a car that I'd conveniently forgotten for the purposes of being nostalgic.OurGloriousLeader said:
1. Grittier, more involving story.
2. More believable characters.
3. Much more well designed and thought out city.
4. Greater levels of realism in vehicle handling and combat (especially CQC).
5. More accessible HUD system w/directions to waypoints.
Five main points to begin with, the rest are all the smaller things. In return, I'd like five reasons why it's not as good as the rest?
2. More believable characters.
3. Much more well designed and thought out city.
4. Greater levels of realism in vehicle handling and combat (especially CQC).
5. More accessible HUD system w/directions to waypoints.
Five main points to begin with, the rest are all the smaller things. In return, I'd like five reasons why it's not as good as the rest?
Well, the last three hours were a blast and a half, I sort of lost interest as soon as I beat the Storyline
I was kinda disappointed, it was great until I beat the main missions. After that, I shelved it and went back to CoD4, the online was kinda weak in GTA4 despite all of its different modes and features.
I've only played GTA a few times at a friend's house, and only done two missions (one I forgot, the other was the bank robbery one). I mostly just killed random people and wasted all my friend's money and ammo.
Anyway, the thing I find perplexing is that people are treating this as if it were a real game. I've seen reviews calling it one of the greatest games of all time, giving it perfect scores... I just really don't understand this. Grand Theft Auto games are NOT real games. Even Yahtzee gave it a mostly positive review. This isn't Bioshock you're playing. It's just a Grand Theft Auto game. You buy it so you can kill random people on the street. That's it.
Again, maybe there's more to it than meets the eye. Maybe there is a real story behind it that has interesting characters and plot twists and yada yada yada. I don't know. But, I really, really doubt it.
Anyway, the thing I find perplexing is that people are treating this as if it were a real game. I've seen reviews calling it one of the greatest games of all time, giving it perfect scores... I just really don't understand this. Grand Theft Auto games are NOT real games. Even Yahtzee gave it a mostly positive review. This isn't Bioshock you're playing. It's just a Grand Theft Auto game. You buy it so you can kill random people on the street. That's it.
Again, maybe there's more to it than meets the eye. Maybe there is a real story behind it that has interesting characters and plot twists and yada yada yada. I don't know. But, I really, really doubt it.
O......K........ well I already gave you three to start with, but if you really want i'll give you another five, if it means that much to you. Although I think that i'll do them as answers to your 'good' points
You say - Grittier, more involving story.
I Say - There was no advance in 'grittiness'. CJ returns from liberty city where he's been making a living by robbing people, because his mum is killed by baller's doing a drive-by. Upon his return he is forced down a path of criminality by three corrupt policemen, two of whom are covering up their murder of a fellow policeman. To me as a story, that is pretty damn gritty, and tbh i found the story of GTA4 the least involving of the series, including GTA: Vice City Stories, the story of which was terrible
You Say - More believable characters.
I Say - Really? how many ex people smugglers do you know who went on to live illegally in a major metropolitan area commiting atrocious crimes and getting away with it? The trick that rockstar (and seemingly you) have missed is that the actions you are required to commit in a game such as GTA require an exaggerated arena in which to take place. Trying to ramp up the realism in a manufactured locale is fine, but it really jars with the immersion of the experience if the actions of your protagonist defies the verisimilitude of the setting.
You Say - Much more well designed and thought out city.
I Say - No chance! unless you enjoy queueing to pay to cross a bridge, or if you do decide to take a girlfriend out having to either be in the general location before making the phone call, or get a taxi to her place unless you like arriving at her place just as the notification appears to tell you that you are too late. The city design was o.k. sure, but not a selling point and certainly not the leap in level design that the original liberty city offered. You also have to analyze the validity of the city layout, being as the missions were basically point to point, and the sandbox mode upon completion of the main adventure was basically useless.
You Say - Greater levels of realism in vehicle handling and combat (especially CQC).
I Say - First off i have no idea what cqc is, but in any review the vehicle handling has been lambasted, and there is a reason for this - they have ramped up the realism! There is a fine line between believability and fun in games, and rockstar have crossed that line with the vehicles. If you find these adjustments to the game mechanics improvements, then why dont we go the whole hog and have car keys, re-fueling at petrol stations and having to renew your tax disc? As for the combat, it has been vastly improved, especially the cover system which should really have been implemented long ago.
You Say - More accessible HUD system w/directions to waypoints.
I Say - I didn't really find the last hud system that inaccessable, tbh. Also the introduction of the sat nav in every car helped, sure, but i think its also contributed to the seeming linearity that has encroached on the series.
Thankyou for reading, i really don't want to come across as sacastic but these are my viewpoints.
You say - Grittier, more involving story.
I Say - There was no advance in 'grittiness'. CJ returns from liberty city where he's been making a living by robbing people, because his mum is killed by baller's doing a drive-by. Upon his return he is forced down a path of criminality by three corrupt policemen, two of whom are covering up their murder of a fellow policeman. To me as a story, that is pretty damn gritty, and tbh i found the story of GTA4 the least involving of the series, including GTA: Vice City Stories, the story of which was terrible
You Say - More believable characters.
I Say - Really? how many ex people smugglers do you know who went on to live illegally in a major metropolitan area commiting atrocious crimes and getting away with it? The trick that rockstar (and seemingly you) have missed is that the actions you are required to commit in a game such as GTA require an exaggerated arena in which to take place. Trying to ramp up the realism in a manufactured locale is fine, but it really jars with the immersion of the experience if the actions of your protagonist defies the verisimilitude of the setting.
You Say - Much more well designed and thought out city.
I Say - No chance! unless you enjoy queueing to pay to cross a bridge, or if you do decide to take a girlfriend out having to either be in the general location before making the phone call, or get a taxi to her place unless you like arriving at her place just as the notification appears to tell you that you are too late. The city design was o.k. sure, but not a selling point and certainly not the leap in level design that the original liberty city offered. You also have to analyze the validity of the city layout, being as the missions were basically point to point, and the sandbox mode upon completion of the main adventure was basically useless.
You Say - Greater levels of realism in vehicle handling and combat (especially CQC).
I Say - First off i have no idea what cqc is, but in any review the vehicle handling has been lambasted, and there is a reason for this - they have ramped up the realism! There is a fine line between believability and fun in games, and rockstar have crossed that line with the vehicles. If you find these adjustments to the game mechanics improvements, then why dont we go the whole hog and have car keys, re-fueling at petrol stations and having to renew your tax disc? As for the combat, it has been vastly improved, especially the cover system which should really have been implemented long ago.
You Say - More accessible HUD system w/directions to waypoints.
I Say - I didn't really find the last hud system that inaccessable, tbh. Also the introduction of the sat nav in every car helped, sure, but i think its also contributed to the seeming linearity that has encroached on the series.
Thankyou for reading, i really don't want to come across as sacastic but these are my viewpoints.
All right.AlexHarman said:
1. Not as many weapons, an example in my first post in this thread: Weapon to Better version of Weapon to RPG.
2. Not as many vehicles like PLANES, cars, helicopters, TANKS, ect..
3. Not as big of a city, it can be dense but alteast add a few more square miles.
4. Not enough customization. I actually liked the stat system in SA, if you eat to much you get fat and stuff.
5. More story oriented which could be a problem for people who really liked to just ignore th story in SA or VC.
I agree with 1-3, 4 i guess is okay, and 5 also.
@Wlkn: It's not that GTA4 doesn't have this or that, it's that they revmoved some of hte stuff that made it awesome, like the dildo! Rockstar took away alot of the things that really defined the GTa series for being fun and awesome.
But whatever, let's wait for GTA5 and THEN we can complain about what we don't like about that game!
1.Multiplayer sucks.
2.American Dream is bullshit and Niko's everybody's *****.
3.With the exception to Little Jacob and Roman, other characters disappear as soon as you finish their story arc.I'd love to get Dwayne back on top or listen to some more of Brucie's awesome dialogue.
4.Killing/Sparing a character makes no difference and gives you no visible dis/advantage.
5.Story Twist is plainly retarded.It changes two cut-scenes and one mission and the main bad guy is still Dimitri no matter which one you chose.And why has he sent an assassin after Niko anyway?
6.There's a lot less stuff to do.In fact aside from killin people,stealing cars(Brucie's Missions) and doing Story Mission there's absolutely nothing you can do.
7.There's a lot less fun items.No more gokarts,chainsaws and Gimp Suits.
2.American Dream is bullshit and Niko's everybody's *****.
3.With the exception to Little Jacob and Roman, other characters disappear as soon as you finish their story arc.I'd love to get Dwayne back on top or listen to some more of Brucie's awesome dialogue.
4.Killing/Sparing a character makes no difference and gives you no visible dis/advantage.
5.Story Twist is plainly retarded.It changes two cut-scenes and one mission and the main bad guy is still Dimitri no matter which one you chose.And why has he sent an assassin after Niko anyway?
6.There's a lot less stuff to do.In fact aside from killin people,stealing cars(Brucie's Missions) and doing Story Mission there's absolutely nothing you can do.
7.There's a lot less fun items.No more gokarts,chainsaws and Gimp Suits.
There's still a dildo. I don't know if it can do whatever it did in the previous games [As I've never played them], but you can throw it at people.Jumplion said:
Just on some of your points because they are similar to what I've been thinking:JakubK666 said:
2. I think that's the point. If you listen to Roman and Nico's conversations in the car, Roman is a dreamer and really wants to believe that his "new" life is better than the one he left behind, whereas Nico is hardened and knows that the more things change the more they stay the same. He knows the game hasn't changed, he's just trying to play the best odds.
3. I think Brucie is the best character in the game, both in the way he is animated and acted. He would be something that I point to if people ask me what sets this game apart from the others. Although I haven't finished the game, I've finished his missions and I can still call him for drinks or a heli ride.
I know what you mean by Dwayne though. I love it how the characters are so well developed that you can start of liking them and then learn what they are really like and hate them or vice versa. It would have been good to be able to choose who to back or who to betray but I guess that's the next level of gaming.
4. True but I did get a certain amount of satisfaction from the choices that I made. It's better than not having the option IMHO.
In answer to the broader question, I was not disappointed with GTA4. It seems to have taken all the good parts of the previous games, streamlined and then combined them. That said, it's still get car, drive to destination, kill guy, drive back, but the superb characters and story go a long way to making you forget the monotony (although the date/friend "mission" eventually get old).
I sure as hell was - here is my "let down"
After playing it for so long it's like Rockstar thought "OK, we've finished giving every single person in liberty city a life...oh wait, we forgot to make THE GAME!!!"
This game was given a 10 on almost every site on the internet, and being heralded as "the best game ever!!!" because it had a cell phone, T.V. and the city was alive, too bad they forgot to review the actual game.
Long story short, liberty city is awesome, but the game sucks. Hence why I still haven't beaten the game - I'm too busy in my "Sandbox".
After playing it for so long it's like Rockstar thought "OK, we've finished giving every single person in liberty city a life...oh wait, we forgot to make THE GAME!!!"
This game was given a 10 on almost every site on the internet, and being heralded as "the best game ever!!!" because it had a cell phone, T.V. and the city was alive, too bad they forgot to review the actual game.
Long story short, liberty city is awesome, but the game sucks. Hence why I still haven't beaten the game - I'm too busy in my "Sandbox".
I'm surprised no one's mentioned this yet:
I hated Niko Bellic. Yes, Rockstar, we know that all the "cool kids" are trying to make their games more realistic, but having a protagonist with genuine remorse kind of ruins the point of GTA. You're supposed to kill people and do atrocious things without having to feel bad about it. It's kind of hard to do that, though, when the protagonist says things like, "I promised myself I wouldn't kill people in this country." Ugh.
One of the main reasons that Vice City was such an amazing game was that they made Tommy Vercetti such a convincing psychopath; the sarcastic, dark comments that he made whenever he killed someone (quite clearly enjoying himself as he did it) were one of the best components of the game. While they scaled back on this in San Andreas, since CJ didn't really seem to enjoy killing that much, they kept the complete lack of remorse so that there was nothing stopping the player from squealing with delight at running over hookers to get your money back even if the protagonist didn't. However, with GTAIV, your character doesn't seem to like what he does, and you either have to (a) avoid identifying with the character or (b) avoid the bloodshed that made the series great in the first place. Either way, you're missing out on a major part of the experience.
I guess this is just a rant on the trend toward "realism" in general. I don't really understand why everything has to be as realistic as possible; just because it's possible with current graphics does not mean that it needs to be done, nor does that mean that the non-graphical elements of the game need to be made realistic. Maybe I'm just not in the target group, but I for one GO OUTSIDE when I want more realism.
I hated Niko Bellic. Yes, Rockstar, we know that all the "cool kids" are trying to make their games more realistic, but having a protagonist with genuine remorse kind of ruins the point of GTA. You're supposed to kill people and do atrocious things without having to feel bad about it. It's kind of hard to do that, though, when the protagonist says things like, "I promised myself I wouldn't kill people in this country." Ugh.
One of the main reasons that Vice City was such an amazing game was that they made Tommy Vercetti such a convincing psychopath; the sarcastic, dark comments that he made whenever he killed someone (quite clearly enjoying himself as he did it) were one of the best components of the game. While they scaled back on this in San Andreas, since CJ didn't really seem to enjoy killing that much, they kept the complete lack of remorse so that there was nothing stopping the player from squealing with delight at running over hookers to get your money back even if the protagonist didn't. However, with GTAIV, your character doesn't seem to like what he does, and you either have to (a) avoid identifying with the character or (b) avoid the bloodshed that made the series great in the first place. Either way, you're missing out on a major part of the experience.
I guess this is just a rant on the trend toward "realism" in general. I don't really understand why everything has to be as realistic as possible; just because it's possible with current graphics does not mean that it needs to be done, nor does that mean that the non-graphical elements of the game need to be made realistic. Maybe I'm just not in the target group, but I for one GO OUTSIDE when I want more realism.